Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Amrita School of Dentistry, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Kochi, Kerala, India, Phone: +91 6235528281, e-mail:
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Amrita School of Dentistry, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Kochi, Kerala, India.
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2020 Dec 1;21(12):1389-1392.
To compare r oot microcrack formation after r oot canal preparation using ProTaper Next in r otation or forward r eciprocation and Waveone gold in r everse r eciprocating motion.
Buccal r oots of 60 maxillary premolars with mature apices were selected, for different instrumentation techniques and divided into three groups. Coronal access was achieved and the canals were confirmed for apical patency. The canals were then instrumented using the following instrumentation techniques: ProTaper Next in r otation or forward r eciprocation or Waveone gold in r everse reciprocation. The tooth was then subjected to sectioning using a diamond saw under water cooling and then was visualized under the stereomicroscope for dentinal microcrack.
The results showed that the maximum dentinal microcrack formed at apical 3 and 6 mm was in Waveone gold in reverse reciprocation followed by ProTaper Next in forward reciprocation and rotation. However, the value was found to be not significant at 3 and 6 mm ( value-0.082 and 0.23).
Nickle titanium rotary instruments tend to induce varied degrees of root dentinal damage during canal instrumentation. ProTaper Next files in rotation as well as forward reciprocation presented with minimal microcrack defects when compared with Waveone gold.
Root canal preparation, when performed by manual or engine-driven techniques, has shown to produce structural defects in the root dentin. One of the causes of failures in root canal treatment is because of fracture in the dentin that occurs due to these procedures. Though all the motion kinematics caused microcracks in this study, it was seen that rotational motion produced the least structural damage to the dentin.
比较使用 ProTaper Next 旋转或正向往复运动与 Waveone Gold 反向往复运动进行根管预备后根管微裂纹的形成。
选择 60 颗上颌前磨牙的颊侧根管，采用不同的器械技术分为三组。进行冠向入口，确认根尖通畅。然后使用以下器械技术对根管进行预备：ProTaper Next 旋转或正向往复运动或 Waveone Gold 反向往复运动。然后用金刚石锯在水下冷却下对牙齿进行切片，然后在立体显微镜下观察牙本质微裂纹。
结果表明，在根尖 3 和 6mm 处形成的最大牙本质微裂纹是在 Waveone Gold 反向往复运动之后，其次是 ProTaper Next 正向往复运动和旋转。然而，在 3 和 6mm 处， 值没有显著差异（ 值为-0.082 和 0.23）。
镍钛旋转器械在根管预备过程中容易引起不同程度的根牙本质损伤。与 Waveone Gold 相比，ProTaper Next 旋转和正向往复锉在根管预备时产生的微裂纹缺陷最小。
手动或机动技术进行根管预备时，已显示出在根管牙本质中产生结构缺陷。根管治疗失败的原因之一是由于这些程序导致的牙本质断裂。虽然所有运动运动学在本研究中都导致微裂纹，但旋转运动对牙本质造成的结构损伤最小。
